From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 06FC33858C20; Tue, 7 Mar 2023 02:52:41 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 06FC33858C20 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1678157562; bh=+QgawYdVTdYXv5hqI5SQI5s5akYG8Er/KsFRlGMSnYg=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=eAkswIgS2BzmYTiybwtYF3YAt0uGzrsHOudaJjDpV27ciMME+aK8hFkzgJFmzd4h7 yiBocgUOaxQHdH9kCxiSEgZ3RHIyj7r4duI9xTVESyDptf06RSOKWc8m45YEN5wQFH TE22hDtYezC/6TMO/8iL/WoLFdSutt0N7wwg+x+I= From: "crazylht at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/108938] Missing bswap detection Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2023 02:52:41 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: target X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: crazylht at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D108938 --- Comment #11 from Hongtao.liu --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9) > Though, if more than one replacement operation is emitted, one needs to be > careful not to emit more expensive replacement than the original sequence > (especially if some subexpressions aren't single use). The patch(support swap + bit_and + rotate) doesn't show much impact on SPEC2017, is there any other benchmark that I can try to find some performa= nce regressiones with bswap + bit_and + rotate? So that I'll restrict the patch to only bswp + rotate/shift.=